Comments on: Is Ted Thompson wide receiver mad?https://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2008/05/21/is-ted-thompson-wide-receiver-mad/
All Things Green Bay PackersTue, 06 Dec 2016 08:58:20 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.com/By: toolkienhttps://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2008/05/21/is-ted-thompson-wide-receiver-mad/#comment-13213
Sun, 13 Feb 2011 22:12:03 +0000http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=787#comment-13213Maybe he just wanted to make sure the Pack didn’t end up with a Bill Schroeder as a #1 receiver.
]]>By: awhayeshttps://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2008/05/21/is-ted-thompson-wide-receiver-mad/#comment-1720
Thu, 22 May 2008 21:27:18 +0000http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=787#comment-1720Aaron,
Good point – with the more important draft picks (the earlier ones), a good argument could be made that he hasn’t done too badly with the early ones (though again, I wouldn’t put Murphy in the great pick category as he only played in 3 games in his career).

My overall point really is that between drafting more WRs than any other position and consistently keeping a bunch of WRs on the roster, TT’s focus seems to be disproportionately in favor of WRs to the possible exclusion of other players at positions of greater need.

I hear you on the percentages, but how many of those were Day One picks? Of the what-would-have-been 50 percent ‘hits’ – Jennings, Jones and Murphy were all premium first-day (until this year) picks.

I don’t mind him missing out on guys like Clowney later in the draft when he traded back several times to acquire multiple picks. If he had traded up to get the likes of Clowney there would be cause for concern. That’s what eroded the Packers’ depth so badly under Sherman…

]]>By: awhayeshttps://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2008/05/21/is-ted-thompson-wide-receiver-mad/#comment-1707
Wed, 21 May 2008 19:21:50 +0000http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=787#comment-1707MC – you may be onto something w/re to MM perhaps requesting to keep more than the traditional 4-5 WRs or more simply, that MM may be behind this somehow. In fact, MM apparently has a huge play-book with hundreds of plays (many still unused) and maybe he has some kind of plan to revolutionize NFL offenses by changing some of the traditional sets most teams use (for example, we’ve already seen his 5 WR sets, tight ends in the backfield and some other offensive innovations). I actually wouldn’t be too surprised if this were part of his overall plan.

Still, I wouldn’t really have a problem with keeping extra WRs if there weren’t roster space limits. But considering there are limits, I’d rather use any extra roster spots on areas of greater need like CBs, LBs, FBs, DEs, RBs, or even safeties.

]]>By: awhayeshttps://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2008/05/21/is-ted-thompson-wide-receiver-mad/#comment-1706
Wed, 21 May 2008 18:20:35 +0000http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=787#comment-1706Dave – interesting thoughts and I really like your new word of “genius-itude” (packergeeks is a big fan of making up words just like this…).

I haven’t heard of any plans to try any of the present WRs at CB, but I suppose it could happen. While I do think there are similarities between CB and WR and the transition wouldn’t be impossible (in fact, Packer CB Will Blackmon is an example of a college WR who is playing CB in the NFL), I would be somewhat surprised if TT had specific plans to turn any of the WRs on the roster now into CBs. I think that the position of corner (like many other positions frankly) has become a highly specialized position in recent years and that if a CB were needed, drafting a CB or getting a free agent CB would be the advisable route.

]]>By: MChttps://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2008/05/21/is-ted-thompson-wide-receiver-mad/#comment-1705
Wed, 21 May 2008 18:10:41 +0000http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=787#comment-1705My guess is that there’s no top-secret WR plan, per se, but Ted just happened to target a few guys whose raw skills were really intriguing to him; it just so happens that they play wideout and are now part of a logjam at the position…

Although, heck, maybe McCarthy has designs on keeping a whopping seven wideouts on the roster and Ted is just accomodating him.

]]>By: awhayeshttps://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2008/05/21/is-ted-thompson-wide-receiver-mad/#comment-1704
Wed, 21 May 2008 18:10:40 +0000http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=787#comment-1704someonesstory – good point, Murphy did look to be a decent prospect before his unfortunate injury and if he’d panned out, TT’s % would be closer to 50% – which probably wouldn’t be bad. But he didn’t pan out. And, I’d still argue that especially this year, TT has used too many draft picks and roster spots on WRs.
]]>By: Dave in Tucsonhttps://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2008/05/21/is-ted-thompson-wide-receiver-mad/#comment-1703
Wed, 21 May 2008 17:12:39 +0000http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=787#comment-1703This is probably just going to reveal my lack of football genius-itude, but is it possible that one or more of these guys could be transitioned to the defense to play cornerback?

How big a difference is there in the skill sets between WR and CB? I know I’ve heard commentators say thinks like cornerbacks are just receivers that can’t catch.

Or is this just an issue of money (WR Salaries > CB Salaries?)

-Dave

]]>By: someonesstoryhttps://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2008/05/21/is-ted-thompson-wide-receiver-mad/#comment-1702
Wed, 21 May 2008 16:46:03 +0000http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=787#comment-1702In defense of the players he’s picked at the position, I’d point out that Thompson picked Terrence Murphy with his second second round pick in 2005, and Murphy looked like he would be a quality player before his career ended due to a neck injury.
]]>